Latest Tweets:

"

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

"

an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

HOLY FUCK THE TRUTH.

Can every one of my male followers read this? And please, before you get defensive (“I would never rape anyone!”) keep in mind, women being afraid of Shrodinger’s Rapists (oh my god i still can’t get over the encompassing brilliance of this phrase) is a conditioned, learned response from being immersed in rape culture and the evolution of sexism and sexual violence in our society from the day we’re born. And unfortunately, it’s very difficult to unlearn without the efforts of all genders to dismantle it. Which is where you come in.

(via lil-ith)

It’s also just rude and disrespectful to patently ignore what someone has told you regarding their personal space, body, and time. Get a clue.

(via geekdomme)

I will always reblog this. Always.

(via myherocomplex)

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone.

(via alamaris)

yes

(via thefitally)

(Source: lostgrrrls, via laughterkey)

(Source: meorzo, via timetogoblackandgold)

(Source: hupperts, via bookoisseur)

catsbeaversandducks:

"Oh I’ll have this one, thanks!"

(via laughterkey)

oldie but a goodie. this guy needs to always carry keys

Look out for the girl...

Anonymous said: So it seems stalker might get off lightly. How would you feel about that, silly little idiot.

maureenjohnsonbooks:

melissaanelli:

How I feel has nothing to do with it. I immediately sent this message to the NZ police and directly to the FBI and directly to the victims’ assistance counsel who has been keeping me up to date on everything, informing them that you, my stalker, have now broken the terms of your arrest.

The terms, as a refresher, were:

  • No using the Internet
  • No using post
  • No contacting Melissa Anelli or any of her family and friends
  • No contacting anyone in North America. 

No one but my stalker would have had any information about the severity or lack thereof of her sentence. And after 6.5 years I can spot a sentence she has written from a mile away without reading glasses. I am publishing this so that it is well known that she has broken the terms of her bail. Because the last time I wasn’t silent about one of her messages, it led to her arrest. I don’t want this break of her bail conditions - while awaiting sentencing no less! - to go unnoted. 

The Melissa of a year ago would not have published this. But I am so done. I have done everything everyone has asked. I have written the letters to the judges going over the whole thing in excruciating and personally painful detail. I have saved evidence with the organization of a librarian. I have answered every question and waited through every deferment and delay, and I am done just doing what is usually done in these instances. This is endless, and it is harmful, and it must stop, and “getting off lightly” would be a complete travesty. As is the fact that no one is monitoring her well enough to see how she is breaking the terms of her bail, and that no one is convinced she should be incarcerated in some fashion.

You know what I’m not done with, and can’t just decide to be done with? Being a victim. That is up to the people who work for the legal system of New Zealand. My being a victim. Up to them. How I deal with being a victim? Up to me. Whether I am continually victimized? Them.

And maybe making this public will make me less sympathetic to some judge down there and that will lessen her sentence for some completely non-sensical reason, I don’t know. But I am so beyond done with it being everyone else's call. 

This is life with a serious stalker. Everyone who is worried about harassment on the Internet needs to see and know and understand this. This goes beyond getting hordes of hateful or threatening YouTube comments: this is about when someone gets in. We are talking about 6.5 years of constant threats and abuse that go offline and into the physical realm, stalking and harassment that touch everyone I know, that has not yet been deterred by TWO ARRESTS and the threat of jail. If you aren’t sure what this post is about, read this for a reminder.

Excuse me. I must now go and undo all of the small victories from the past few months, starting with the allowing of asks.

It was nice there, for a while, feeling normal.

I share this, because this story has been such a horror. 6.5 years. Hundreds—is it thousands? it must be well into the thousands now—of graphic rape and death threats coming from one clearly identified (self-identified, even) person. An FBI investigation. Two arrests. And still, even during sentencing, the stalker tries to taunt Melissa.

This is the reality of online stalking.

Here’s my wish: that this case is a precedent for justice and action taken. If the New Zealand courts fail now, then they really fail. Please share this—because it’s real. I’ve seen this, what’s it’s done to Melissa. I’ve gotten notes from the stalker myself. Press, victim services, whatever you can reach, please reach. Please reblog. This one has to end. They all have to end.

*9

893thecurrent:

Brian WilsonDave Grohl of the Foo FightersStevie WonderLordeElton JohnBrian May of QueenJake BuggKylie MinogueChris Martin of ColdplayChrissie Hyndeof the PretendersSam SmithPaloma FaithOne Direction, and Florence Welch of Florence and the Machine were among 27 musicians who constituted a one-off supergroup known as “the Impossible Orchestra,” performing the Beach Boys‘ “God Only Knows” in the BBC’s first-ever pan-channel broadcast across all its stations. The Tuesday afternoon broadcast marked the launch of BBC Music, a new umbrella brand for the BBC’s music content.

more of today’s music news

*76

ebookfriendly:

“All about the books” song awesomely performed by librarians (video) http://ift.tt/1r952E1

Do you know Meghan Trainor’s All about that bass song? Even if you don’t, you have to watch the magnetic video above.

Staffers and supporters of the Nashville Public Library got together to record an awesome live cover of Meghan Trainor’s megahit.

(via libraryjournal)

retrotrash:

brainstatic:

historic-upstart:

stfueverything:

dbvictoria:

With all the heat Anita Sarkeesian gets for her Tropes series, you’d think it was a new topic, but Gene Siskel & Roger Ebert had a discussion on a similar theme when they were talking about the influx of slasher movies on their show in 1980.

(x)

34 years later and this is STILL relevant

WHOA. I had never seen anything about them doing this.

It’s a shame people remember them for their thumbs.

the more things change…

(via 1-800-dominos)